Title of Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor
October 30, 2022 4:38 PM Subscribe
Hasn't she always been Lady Lilibet?
Seeking input from a British titles expert.
Much has been made of when/if Prince Harry's two children will be given the titles prince and princess in accordance with the rules established in 1917 by King George V. But, the thing that puzzles me is that from her birth she has been listed on the official Royal Family page as Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor, but. as the daughter of a Duke, hasn't she always been The Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor?
For example, Prince Edward's daughter is listed as The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor on the same list because her father is an Earl.
Seeking input from a British titles expert.
Much has been made of when/if Prince Harry's two children will be given the titles prince and princess in accordance with the rules established in 1917 by King George V. But, the thing that puzzles me is that from her birth she has been listed on the official Royal Family page as Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor, but. as the daughter of a Duke, hasn't she always been The Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor?
For example, Prince Edward's daughter is listed as The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor on the same list because her father is an Earl.
She's also technically a princess of the kingdom since her grandfather became king (Wikipedia link).
While her name has never been formally styled with a title, at the time of her birth she was entitled to use the courtesy title "Lady" before her given name as the daughter of a duke. Upon the accession of her grandfather King Charles III on 8 September 2022, she also legally became a princess of the United Kingdom. This entitlement comes from letters patent issued by King George V in 1917, which state that the children of the sons of any sovereign of the United Kingdom “shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of prince or princess.” As is the case with her brother, Archie, it is uncertain whether she will use a title, at least while primarily residing with her parents in the United States.posted by mochapickle at 5:38 PM on October 30, 2022 [2 favorites]
I imagine her parents don't use the courtesy title for her as part of their attempted differentiation from the royal family. (HRH is different, because of the security that goes with the title.)
posted by praemunire at 5:44 PM on October 30, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by praemunire at 5:44 PM on October 30, 2022 [1 favorite]
The Sussexes have decided not to use the courtesy titles for their children. Her brother Archie would be Earl of Dunbarton but is styled Master Archie, you can see some sources on his Wikipedia page.
posted by muddgirl at 5:49 PM on October 30, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by muddgirl at 5:49 PM on October 30, 2022 [2 favorites]
She is also British and a member of the royal family. The title serves no purpose in the US but it does in the UK.
posted by shoesietart at 8:51 PM on October 30, 2022
posted by shoesietart at 8:51 PM on October 30, 2022
Per Debrett's it seems like Prince Harry's kids are in theory entitled to courtesy titles. But Burke's Peerage, like the Royal familiy's webpage, does not assign them any title. Presumably this reflects the wishes of their parents and/or the monarch. It was reported when Archie was born that the couple refused the use of a courtesy title. If you believe the gossip that was due to some combination of thinking that "Earl of Dumbarton" is guaranteed to get the poor kid made fun of in school and messy intra-family drama.
posted by Wretch729 at 10:21 PM on October 30, 2022
posted by Wretch729 at 10:21 PM on October 30, 2022
Security is not linked to the HRH title, see the daughters of Andrew who had their taxpayer-funded security withdrawn over ten years ago.
posted by TWinbrook8 at 9:56 AM on October 31, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by TWinbrook8 at 9:56 AM on October 31, 2022 [1 favorite]
The precedent is to follow letters patent, except that you may choose to 'downgrade' yourself or your minor children. The relevant letters patent* are from 1917 and state that HRH Princess X of Y applies to the male line granddaughters of a sovereign. Otherwise, the daughter of a duke (or marquess or earl) is styled Lady X Surname.
An example of someone choosing to downgrade themselves is Lady Patricia Ramsay (originally HRH Princess Patricia of Connaught). An example of someone choosing to downgrade their minor children is in relation to Lady Louise Windsor. Sophie Wessex has said in an interview that her children can choose at age 18 to take up their HRH titles but anticipates that they won't want to. Lady Louise is over 18 and does not appear to be using her HRH.
So, the position for Lilibet is believed to be as follows.
From birth until 8 September 2022, she was the daughter of a male-line grandson of a sovereign, and that grandson was also a duke. So she was entitled to be styled "Lady Lililbet Mountbatten-Windsor". Other people who were in a similar position at birth were Lady Davina Windsor, Lady Rose Windsor (daughters of HRH The Duke of Gloucestershire), and Lady Helen Windsor (daughter of HRH The Duke of Kent), all of whom have subsequently married and changed their surnames.
From 8 September 2022 onwards she is the daughter of the sovereign's son and entitled to be styled "HRH Princess Lilibet of Sussex". Other people who have been in a similar position are HRH Princess Beatrice of York and HRH Princess Eugenie of York (daughters of the Duke of York). Lady Louise Windsor is also entitled to be styled in this way (as HRH Princess of Louise of Wessex) but never has been in practice.
However, when Archie was born, it was stated that Harry and Meghan wanted him to be styled Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor rather than Archie, Earl of Dumbarton for example or Lord Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, which might also have been correct. It was perceived in the UK at the time to be the more modern and sensible choice, similar to the decisions of other sensible royals. No statement updating this has been issued. No statement has been made about Lilibet herself, but she appears to be being treated similarly to her brother. That is she is actually styled "Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor".
As for updating it now that Elizabeth II is dead, it's possible that it will just change on the website or something. But Buckingham Palace appear to be taking Harry and Meghan's original choice for Archie's name and style at face value. It is then difficult now for Harry and Meghan, living in the USA (where titles are not used), to credibly argue that they do in fact want their children to have titles.
Apart from Harry and Meghan's views on how welcome they are with Harry's family, part of what a lot of this relates to in practice is, when would the formal styling or royal name be used in any case? As a US citizen, her legal US name is Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor no matter what. She will probably be registered as Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor (or Lilibet Windsor or Lilibet Sussex) at school. She is apparently called Lili by her parents, family and friends. The press will call her whatever they think their readers will recognise and approve of (probably "Harry's daughter, Lilibet" in the tabloids, maybe Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor in the broadsheets). She doesn't have a role in the Royal family because she is a small child and she lives outside the UK, so she's not going to feature in official announcements. The only place where her name might be recorded formally is on the Royal family website or on her British passport** if she has one.
*They were updated in 2013, but only in relation to the children of the Prince of Wales' eldest son. That was to fix a specific anomaly that could have arisen if William's eldest child had been a girl. Harry was not relevant to the change (and indeed had not even met Meghan at that point).
**You can have your your title of nobility listed under observations (and probably should if you use it).
As a further aside, it's notable that English language Wikipedia is a source is generally very good on the titles and styles that people are entitled to, but less good at being clear about what the individual concerned actually chooses to use. An example, is Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, who I think only uses his Dutch titles.
posted by plonkee at 2:33 PM on October 31, 2022 [3 favorites]
An example of someone choosing to downgrade themselves is Lady Patricia Ramsay (originally HRH Princess Patricia of Connaught). An example of someone choosing to downgrade their minor children is in relation to Lady Louise Windsor. Sophie Wessex has said in an interview that her children can choose at age 18 to take up their HRH titles but anticipates that they won't want to. Lady Louise is over 18 and does not appear to be using her HRH.
So, the position for Lilibet is believed to be as follows.
From birth until 8 September 2022, she was the daughter of a male-line grandson of a sovereign, and that grandson was also a duke. So she was entitled to be styled "Lady Lililbet Mountbatten-Windsor". Other people who were in a similar position at birth were Lady Davina Windsor, Lady Rose Windsor (daughters of HRH The Duke of Gloucestershire), and Lady Helen Windsor (daughter of HRH The Duke of Kent), all of whom have subsequently married and changed their surnames.
From 8 September 2022 onwards she is the daughter of the sovereign's son and entitled to be styled "HRH Princess Lilibet of Sussex". Other people who have been in a similar position are HRH Princess Beatrice of York and HRH Princess Eugenie of York (daughters of the Duke of York). Lady Louise Windsor is also entitled to be styled in this way (as HRH Princess of Louise of Wessex) but never has been in practice.
However, when Archie was born, it was stated that Harry and Meghan wanted him to be styled Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor rather than Archie, Earl of Dumbarton for example or Lord Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, which might also have been correct. It was perceived in the UK at the time to be the more modern and sensible choice, similar to the decisions of other sensible royals. No statement updating this has been issued. No statement has been made about Lilibet herself, but she appears to be being treated similarly to her brother. That is she is actually styled "Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor".
As for updating it now that Elizabeth II is dead, it's possible that it will just change on the website or something. But Buckingham Palace appear to be taking Harry and Meghan's original choice for Archie's name and style at face value. It is then difficult now for Harry and Meghan, living in the USA (where titles are not used), to credibly argue that they do in fact want their children to have titles.
Apart from Harry and Meghan's views on how welcome they are with Harry's family, part of what a lot of this relates to in practice is, when would the formal styling or royal name be used in any case? As a US citizen, her legal US name is Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor no matter what. She will probably be registered as Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor (or Lilibet Windsor or Lilibet Sussex) at school. She is apparently called Lili by her parents, family and friends. The press will call her whatever they think their readers will recognise and approve of (probably "Harry's daughter, Lilibet" in the tabloids, maybe Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor in the broadsheets). She doesn't have a role in the Royal family because she is a small child and she lives outside the UK, so she's not going to feature in official announcements. The only place where her name might be recorded formally is on the Royal family website or on her British passport** if she has one.
*They were updated in 2013, but only in relation to the children of the Prince of Wales' eldest son. That was to fix a specific anomaly that could have arisen if William's eldest child had been a girl. Harry was not relevant to the change (and indeed had not even met Meghan at that point).
**You can have your your title of nobility listed under observations (and probably should if you use it).
As a further aside, it's notable that English language Wikipedia is a source is generally very good on the titles and styles that people are entitled to, but less good at being clear about what the individual concerned actually chooses to use. An example, is Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, who I think only uses his Dutch titles.
posted by plonkee at 2:33 PM on October 31, 2022 [3 favorites]
As TWinbrook8 states, security is not directly linked to HRH status.
A number of people with HRH do not have any official security (the York princesses, I think also the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, Duke and Duchess of Kent, Princess Alexandra, and Prince and Princess Michael of Kent may not have any). Even more people have security only while they are carrying out official business (for example, the Princess Royal, the Earl and Countess of Wessex). If you're thinking "who even are some of those people?" then that's kind of the point, since the early- to mid-2000s, security has been provided based on risk. Of course, it's possible that having an HRH makes inherently you more at risk, but I think that's actually unlikely. The extended royal family is just not that well known.
It is believed that Harry had always had full-time Royal protection officer security. My impression is also that he is not hugely familiar with the details of how things work within the Royal Family (as 'The Firm') outside of his own particular experience. That's a plausible explanation for why Meghan apparently believed that if her children had HRH status they would be entitled to security, despite several counterexamples. Other plausible explanations exist.
All of this is entirely separate to what kind of security they should have while living in the US and who should foot the bill for it. Judicial review proceedings are currently underway about in relation to some of those specific decision making processes.
posted by plonkee at 2:52 PM on October 31, 2022 [2 favorites]
A number of people with HRH do not have any official security (the York princesses, I think also the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, Duke and Duchess of Kent, Princess Alexandra, and Prince and Princess Michael of Kent may not have any). Even more people have security only while they are carrying out official business (for example, the Princess Royal, the Earl and Countess of Wessex). If you're thinking "who even are some of those people?" then that's kind of the point, since the early- to mid-2000s, security has been provided based on risk. Of course, it's possible that having an HRH makes inherently you more at risk, but I think that's actually unlikely. The extended royal family is just not that well known.
It is believed that Harry had always had full-time Royal protection officer security. My impression is also that he is not hugely familiar with the details of how things work within the Royal Family (as 'The Firm') outside of his own particular experience. That's a plausible explanation for why Meghan apparently believed that if her children had HRH status they would be entitled to security, despite several counterexamples. Other plausible explanations exist.
All of this is entirely separate to what kind of security they should have while living in the US and who should foot the bill for it. Judicial review proceedings are currently underway about in relation to some of those specific decision making processes.
posted by plonkee at 2:52 PM on October 31, 2022 [2 favorites]
For completeness.
When the then Princess Elizabeth was pregnant her child wouldn't, under the existing letters patent, have been styled prince or princess because they would have been a female-line grandchild. This was addressed specifically in an update by her father George VI, so that Charles and Anne were styled prince and princess from birth. This made sense because in practice Elizabeth was always going to be his heir, and one of her children would most likely reign. Andrew and Edward were born while Elizabeth was on the throne, and so were HRH Prince from birth as children of a sovereign.
For slightly different reasons, Elizabeth also ensured that Prince William's children would all be prince or princess from birth. This was because the order of succession is now in strict order of birth, and no longer favours men. They thought it would look odd if the eldest (and so most likely to inherit the throne) was a girl and styled Lady X of Cambridge, and the second was a boy and styled Prince X of Cambridge (despite being unlikely to inherit the throne). Which is what the existing letters patent would have done. Better to make them all Prince/Princess of Cambridge from birth. As it happens the first was a boy and the point was moot.
It is possible that Harry expected a similar change to be made for his children, but if so that was unrealistic. If there are any future changes, they are much more likely to reduce the number of people with HRH and Prince/Princess, rather than increase them. These kinds of changes have been happening in a number of European monarchies over the past couple of decades.
posted by plonkee at 3:11 PM on October 31, 2022 [1 favorite]
When the then Princess Elizabeth was pregnant her child wouldn't, under the existing letters patent, have been styled prince or princess because they would have been a female-line grandchild. This was addressed specifically in an update by her father George VI, so that Charles and Anne were styled prince and princess from birth. This made sense because in practice Elizabeth was always going to be his heir, and one of her children would most likely reign. Andrew and Edward were born while Elizabeth was on the throne, and so were HRH Prince from birth as children of a sovereign.
For slightly different reasons, Elizabeth also ensured that Prince William's children would all be prince or princess from birth. This was because the order of succession is now in strict order of birth, and no longer favours men. They thought it would look odd if the eldest (and so most likely to inherit the throne) was a girl and styled Lady X of Cambridge, and the second was a boy and styled Prince X of Cambridge (despite being unlikely to inherit the throne). Which is what the existing letters patent would have done. Better to make them all Prince/Princess of Cambridge from birth. As it happens the first was a boy and the point was moot.
It is possible that Harry expected a similar change to be made for his children, but if so that was unrealistic. If there are any future changes, they are much more likely to reduce the number of people with HRH and Prince/Princess, rather than increase them. These kinds of changes have been happening in a number of European monarchies over the past couple of decades.
posted by plonkee at 3:11 PM on October 31, 2022 [1 favorite]
Meghan and Harry did not get to decide whether or not Archie got a title, according to the Oprah interview.
posted by jenfullmoon at 4:57 PM on November 1, 2022
posted by jenfullmoon at 4:57 PM on November 1, 2022
Meghan and Harry did not get to decide whether or not Archie got a title, according to the Oprah interview.
Indeed. The only person that can award new titles is the monarch. Some of them can only then be removed by a specific Act of Parliament.
The precedent is that you can choose to use any style that you are entitled to (including a courtesy one or an untitled one). Parents can make such choices on behalf of their minor children. You can also be asked not to use various titles. Choosing not to use your highest title is not commonplace but it is not very unusual.
posted by plonkee at 10:06 AM on November 2, 2022
Indeed. The only person that can award new titles is the monarch. Some of them can only then be removed by a specific Act of Parliament.
The precedent is that you can choose to use any style that you are entitled to (including a courtesy one or an untitled one). Parents can make such choices on behalf of their minor children. You can also be asked not to use various titles. Choosing not to use your highest title is not commonplace but it is not very unusual.
posted by plonkee at 10:06 AM on November 2, 2022
This thread is closed to new comments.
(My extensive reading of romance novels definitely does not make me an expert on British titles or anything else, so someone else please correct me if I'm wrong.)
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:19 PM on October 30, 2022 [2 favorites]